About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
CSPAN 17
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
. ♪ host: good morning, welcome to "washington journal." the fbi investigation that led to the resignation of general david petraeus has expanded to general john allen. the impact of all this on the intelligence community and national security will be part of several hearings on capitol hill later this week. lawmakers return to washington today amid a shake-up of the president obama national security team, facing the looming issue of the so-called fiscal cliff. that is where we want to begin today this morning. president obama will meet later on with labor leaders who are insisting that the president not compromise on cuts to medicare and social security. what is your take on this? avoiding this -- avoiding the fiscal cliff? host: remember, you can send us a clear message, post your comments on facebook, or send us an e-mail, journal@c-span.org. courtesy of the newseum, washington, front page of that newspaper and many of the newspapers this morning, including "the washington post," liberal groups prepare for an entitlement fight. this is what zachary goldfarb rights. -- writes. host: ther
to the pentagon and the i.g. on the one hand and to the f.b.i. with regards to general petraeus. >> he's not -- big picture watching, he's not shaking his head saying, guys, we need a more credible, competent sense of leadership? >> he's not going to make grand pronouncements or decisions about things based on two situations, two individual cases. he's focused on the missions that the military is tasked with carrying out and the c.i.a. and the general intelligence community is tasked with carrying out and with enacting his overall agenda. which encompasses not just national security policy but obviously domestic polcy. -- policy. yes. >> jay, has the president spoken to general allen directly? >> not that i'm aware of, no. >> secretary panetta? >> i'd have to check that. secretary panetta has been traveling. >> as sort after follow-up, does the president see this in general as an unwelcomed distraction at a time when he's just -- was re-elected and has a bunch of priorities in terms of the fiscal cliff and his cabinet? >> i certainly i think wouldn't call it welcome. obviously the -- a
and law enforcement, certainly the fbi to get the enormous amounts of fairly sensitive information about our private online activities, a lot of it without a court order. it looks like in this case it probably did get a warrant, but it also shows the incredible threat to them. we are talking about something that started as a cyber harassment investigation that led to the exposure of thousands of e-mails between broadwell and patreus over a period of years. we now have these archives of all of our communications, which compared to something like a wiretap can reveal vast more information. host: what is needed from a federal perspective to get access to the e-mails? guest: some courts have imposed tighter requirements. federal law says under certain circumstances it can be done with just a subpoena. they do not need to show probable cause of the search her home or tap your phone. only to certify that material that they are looking for is relevant. host: there is something called the electronic communications privacy act. guest: that is the 1986 federal law that provides the framework for c
, full fbi investigation every time you go out of the country, you list every address you have ever lived that. very difficult if you don't keep those records. another standard form his financial disclosure. you may have to divest assets, restrictions, sometimes these are onerous. you often have the higher lawyers and accountants to make sure they are filled out right because you have signed a thing at the bottom that says us where this is true and a mistake could have serious consequences. each jurisdiction has its own set of questions. the most important is the white house personnel data statement. they will focus on political liabilities and they want to protect the president, so they're going ask you very invasive questions about an abundance of caution. they will look at every article, every facebook coast. what you post on facebook never goes away. if you are up for office some time, it might come back to bite you. they will ask you embarrassing questions, financial dealings, the arrest record. plagiarism, joe biden and ted kennedy both got caught up. students don't plagiarize, it c
on the fbi investigation going on, and i suspect questions -- fbi investigation going on, and i suspect questions about security, and why chris stevens was in the gaza without better protection -- again, those are separate -- benghazi without better protection -- but again, those are separate questions. host: north carolina. republican. you are next. caller: i think this susan rice thing is a smokescreen. you have somebody that is an ambassador and rehearses talking points, and she does not question or analyze the information, whether it is true or not. the cia says they knew this was a terrorist attack within 24 hours, and days later she is voicing the same thing, as well as president obama. consequently, it looks like the whole problem goes about her. i am a retired captain in the navy. if you do not have leadership and take responsibility, everything goes into disarray. when did the president now what was the -- know what was going on, and who gave the order for that story to be announced as far as it been an attack based on a video. there is a smokescreen going on. host: david, in a
we follow the facts. we do not share outside the justice department, outside the f.b.i. the facts of ongoing investigations. we made the determination as we were going through the matter that there was not a threat to national security. had we made the determination that a threat to national security existed, we would, of course, had made that known to the president and also to the appropriate members on the hill. but as we went through the investigation, looked at the facts and tried to examine them as they developed, we were very -- we felt e very secure in the knowledge that a national security threat did not exist that warranted the sharing of that information with the white house or the hill. but when we got to a point in the investigation and it was very late in the investigation after a very critical interview occurred on the friday before we made that disclosure, when we got to that point when we thought it was appropriate to share the information, we did so. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite
that have to do with police, we have the fbi that is a national organization that has the resources to do things that the local to restrictions, whether state or local, do not have the resources to do. i believe it is possible to have a program for national disaster that is similar to what we do with police, fire, and disasters. we have a guide that was, in my opinion, the master of disaster, and for some reason they have ignored him for years. james lee witt, without question, the most effective person in the federal government during the clinton administration because he knew how to address disasters. all he is now is a paper pusher. that is basically it. guest: there is a lot of people but they there should be a greater federal role in disasters, but also a lot push back from others on the right, especially those that argue disaster relief should be more of a local responsibility, that more of the money should be returned to states that we use for disaster funding. there are a lot of instances where we see municipalities are overwhelmed. a lot of these places they rely on volunteer fir
associated with general allan's nomination. i would refer you to the fbi in terms of the process seized they they follow. the white house counsel was informed and the white house counsel brought that to the president. on sunday, -- on monday evening, the president was notified that secretary panetta had referred the matter to ig. >> but time is a news conference? >> i do not have a time for you yet. >> did the fbi uses as part of a background check on alan? >> i would -- we do not discuss vetting issues. >> that is part of the confirmation process. >> it is not part of the confirmation process. the department of justice notified the white house counsel that there may be an issue associated with general allen's nomination. was nominated to be supreme allied commander. the hearing was pending. >> who is doing this background check? >> i would refer you to justice and the fbi for far from checks? >> has this been distracting on the president on other important matters? >> this in ballston percent -- is embossed important personnel. >> how much time does it take? >> i do not have the time.
organizations to freely operate on twitter is enabling the enemy. the f.b.i. and twitter must recognize sooner than later the social media has a tool for the outlaw terrorists, and it has to stop and that's just the way if is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from california is recognized. >> mr. speaker, as the republican of georgia deals with its first democratic transition of power, i spent the last few days speaking at length with the president and the new prime minister about the necessity to continue the pursuit of the rule of law. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, this is a critical moment for the georgian people that can either put the country on a path of sustainable democracy or turn back the clock on the tremendous gains that have been made since the rose revolution. mr. speaker, the united states must remain engaged with the new government to promo
been under investigation by the f.b.i. it is part of a broader investigation by the accountability review board set up at the president's direction by the secretary of state. no one is more interested in getting to the bottom of what happened than the president is. no one is more interested in bringing to justice those who took the lives of four americans than the president and he is very interested in having the results of those investigations vo provided to him and the american public. >> none of that is going to talk about the? >> the president has been forth right about when he found out about it that he directed actions be taken immediately to provide support for our embassy facilities not just in benghazi but in tripoli and around the world and every action he's taken was driven by -- >> there was a 5:00 meeting but what about after that? >> the president was made aware of developments throughout the evening and days ensuing so i'm not sure what you're question is. >> there were all [indiscernible] . >> when you talk about military we've been answering questions and we'll hav
reports that the fbi is reporting an investigation after hearing that a number of people heard letters from fannie mae that they were ineligible to vote. host: scott, good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. i did not watch c-span until i came across one of your programs during this election and i have been stopped since. i cannot stand to watch fox or msnbc. c-span appears to be one of the only channels that gives a fair and proportionate opinion, a chance for both parties to say their peace. i appreciate the opportunity for me to give mine. thomas jefferson called the electoral college and outdated form. i believe that every vote should count. on the other hand, you would not want texas, california, or new york to determine what the whole country should move forward on. i believe that the electoral college is outdated. i am an independent voter. i voted for clinton back in the day, and i have voted for bush. i voted for obama last time. i am from ohio, but not everyone from ohio is in the unions. there are a lot people out of work here. i am really upset with the fact that mitt ro
trust in the fbi, cia, at home and security. i have complete trust within the confines of their agency walls. if you look at all of the botched terrorist plots that have been occurring since 9/11, it is absolutely amazing what our agencies are doing to keep us safe. who i do not trust is the white house suits who apparently put a spin on the nsa's official briefs and input on worldwide events. i believe the white house puts a political spin on everything that comes to the president, to the secretary of state. then to the american people. it was 9/11 when we had benghazi going down. that is a data i think the president would rather have nothing going down. apparently there was something going down. with petraeus, is it not ironic that he is now being the scrutinized over these extramarital affairs when he is about to testify in regards to what happened in benghazi. >>let's get a couple more comments on facebook and twitter. thank you for all of your calls. coming up next, congressman ron paul, a republican of texas set to retire. he will talk about that, the fiscal cliff, and the latest
the fbi were investigating american torture, rather than american love affairs. and this struck me with security contractors. we have had two months of heated controversy about benghazi and what happened. it was bad. four americans were killed. hundreds of security contractors were killed in iraq. i have written two books on iraq and i have never been able to figure out an exact number. the answer is no one cares and no one seems to care still. the official tally leaves out at least 57 incidents that we know about. the tally is quite suspect. this puts aside the foreign security contractors, south africans, costa ricans. there seems to be no tally of this at all and nobody cares. i have got to wonder how much of the mess in benghazi is simply fueled by fox news, poisoning the american bloodstream. it really bothers me. i compare that to the total carelessness about the deaths of security contractors in iraq. >> thomas ricks writes a blog on foreign policies website. ricks. foreignpolicy.com. he is the author of many books, including a new book called "the generals." let's hear from
the work of the imdwration service. >> you were turning finger prints over to the f.b.i. >> we worked with ice and turned over people when they were arrested. that is the responsibility of the federal government. we can't put that on the towns anywhere in this country. >> you can have the last word on this topic. >> there are three or four different issues. the original question was about rhode island and the drain on the resources. i've looked at that and the drain on the resources is pretty minimal because the number of undock meanted here who utilize the resources this gentleman is talking about is small, only in the dozens. so i'm not going to worry about the drain in rhode island because the numbers don't bear that out. >> what do they contribute to the economy? >> a lot of them have jobs. just because their undock meanted doesn't mean they don't work. i have a good friend who i won't name who is self-plode. he employees several americans and makes well over 100,000 a year but i have no problem with that sort of thing. i have no problem with the idea just because you're undock me
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)